Re: relations aren't types?

"Adrian Kubala" <adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net> wrote in message news:slrnbvs3do.15h.adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net...
> John Jacob <jingleheimerschmitt_at_hotmail.com> schrieb:
> > There *are* values that are not relation or tuple values. What should
> > we call these kind of values? Hey, how bout scalar.
>
> Maybe we should look at other type systems. What sorts of types do most
> type systems have? Product types, like the types of rows in relations.
> Sum types, like enum. Recursively-defined sum types, like lists.
> Polymorphic type constructors, like lists, vectors, or functions. Base
> types like integers.
>
> Types are types -- I don't understand your insistence on calling some
> types scalar and other types not scalar. What's the difference?
>
> And I have to ask, what's an example of a user-defined scalar type?

According to John's use of the word, an integer array type is a scalar type as is a complex number type. A tuple type, however, is not a scalar type. Received on Fri Jan 09 2004 - 06:42:02 CET